Mike wrote:Not to detract from the seriousnesss of the disease, but wondering why 90 people getting it is news?

Note that in this case it is associated with use of a drug, & thus as usual, has prompted calls for yet more FDA oversight in an area of the industry (amazingly) previously overlooked. That is probably the reason it is news â€“ we have a problem, so let's fix it with more regulation. Thus cometh the Kingdom of Heaven (Progressive version).

Anklebiter wrote:Yes, you seem to know the answer already. Things that happen all the time (every day / daily) are not news.Yes, it is the newness of the prevalence of a condition that makes it news.It has a bigger impact. A bit like you saying TWICE that number die every 2 days, when you could have said, the SAME number die every day.Dog bites man happens daily and is not news. Man bites dog is more unsual and hence newsworthy.But I take your point and agree that we should shoot all domestic dogs.

You caught my error, I see. Meant to say that many every two days. But I don't think I could shoot my dog, if I had one. Did shoot a rooster once, though. Does that count?

Mike wrote:Not to detract from the seriousnesss of the disease, but wondering why 90 people getting it is news? ...every 2 days ...daily ...daily ...Do we get so bored with one kind of disease, that we need new disease by which we may be intrigued? ...

Yes, you seem to know the answer already. Things that happen all the time (every day / daily) are not news.Yes, it is the newness of the prevalence of a condition that makes it news.

It has a bigger impact. A bit like you saying TWICE that number die every 2 days, when you could have said, the SAME number die every day.

Dog bites man happens daily and is not news. Man bites dog is more unsual and hence newsworthy.

But I take your point and agree that we should shoot all domestic dogs.